Reykjavik Accords
The Reykjavik Accords were the final stage in the legitimization of private military companies. Signed by representatives of the United Nations Security Council at the Global Security Conference in Reykjavik, it was ratified by the UN less than two months later. History The Accords were the consequence of the increasing role of paramilitary and civilian forces in what had traditionally been considered the duties of national armed forces. In particular, the use of so-called "mercenaries" as security forces in the Middle East created a demand for specialised forces, answerable not to a country but to their employers. In 2012, these issues came to a head with the discovery that fifty-two British citizens were involved in a successful coup in south-west Africa. The new government issued a full pardon to the Britishers, but the remnants of the previous government, who had fled to London and established a government-in-exile, demanded that criminal proceedings be carried out against the "foreign murderers" who had deposed them. Without clear legal precedent, the issue was raised by numerous countries. This debate led to the Global Security Conference, and to the Reykjavik Accords. Articles Article 1 Article 1 covers the basic definitions of "private military company", and declares the intention of the conference delegates to clarify international law. Article 2 Article 2 lays down the requirements for companies protected under the Accords to register with the UN, and the ability of the UN to reject applications. Specific requirements noted include the organisation of a command council, which is intended to function as an independent and accountable leadership group. Article 3 Article 3 explains the exterritoriality of "private military companies" and specifically states that the harbouring of a company's HQ does not make a nation-state liable for their actions. Article 4 Article 4 defines the relationship between the Accords and other international law, with special focus on Article 47 of Protocol I of the Fourth Geneva Convention and the United Nations Mercenary Convention. Article 5 Article 5 clarifies the legal protection of employees of protected companies captured by national armed forces, local police forces, or other protected companies. Article 6 Article 6 clarifies that the granting of recognition by the UN is not equivalent to the condoning of the protected company's actions. Amendment 1 Amendment 1 clarified that no nation was required to permit a protected company to maintain any form of installation, building, cache or facility in their territory. Amendment 2 Amendment 2 defined the procedure by which recognition, once granted, could be removed from a company. Limitations The Accords draw a strict line between companies which are recognised by the UN - and granted the protections of the Accords - and those which are not, and recieve neither protection nor oversight. Opposition Opposition to the Accords was fervent and widespread, particularly among senior military officers. It was believed that permitting PMCs to recieve offical recognition would be equivalent to condoning their actions while being unable to control them. Recognised Companies * League of Freedom * Executive Strike, Inc. * Ni Jiang Zhongwen * Usagi San Kuni Musō